OK, guys, by applying a little layman's logic, we can easily prove that the BMI is NOT the 'gold standard' for measuring health risks.
The unit of measurement for the BMI is kg/m2. That means, how much you weigh per m2, aka. your 'density' / 'mass'. Now, we all know (at least, I hope we all know!
) that fat is heavy, but bones and muscles are even heavier. So, if per m2, you have more muscles and bones than someone else, you WILL end up 'denser', which means, your BMI will be higher.
Now, here, they are using the 'average' measurements of a few people to work out the 'normal' range, etc. Randomly pick two people of the same sex and height and what are the chances that their body type and composition will be the same? That's your 'average' at work for you! Now, depending on how large the sample population is, the 'average' could be skewed, ie. in non-statistical language, it all means that if you pick 1,000 people and average the results, you'll get a different 'average' than if you pick 100,000 people and average their results. And that is because, in a larger group, the possibilities for deviations occur on a slightly larger scale.
Now, would you like to accept the BMI, that doesn't take into consideration your bone and muscle mass, into consideration, as your 'gold standard'?
Today, I have effectively annihilated my New Year's Resolution of moving my BMI into healthier levels!
Now, to work on my overall cardiovascular fitness, strength and flexibility!
Let me actually increase my BMI as the fat gets burnt off and the heavy muscles develop!